Clinical outcomes measurement in pediatric lower limb prosthetics: A scoping review.
Kevin D Koenig, Michelle J Hall, Caroline Gormley and 4 others
PMID 38427511WHAT IT FOUND
41 pediatric lower-limb prosthetic studies used 44 outcome measures, but only 5 had published evidence of accuracy or consistency in these children.
No measure showed it can detect change.
Key findings
0141 eligible pediatric lower-limb prosthetic research articles used 44 standardized outcome measures, and over 80% of those measures appeared in only one or two publications.
02Only five of the 44 measures had publications assessing validity or reliability in children who use lower-limb prostheses, and none had a complete assessment.
03No measure examined had data on responsiveness or normative values.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The review protocol was not registered, and the eligibility rules changed after reviewer suggestions to include non-English articles, gray literature, and research protocols. The search covered published research from 2001 onward, so measures used only in clinical practice and newer measures that were not yet published were not included. Inconsistent terminology in the pediatric prosthetics literature, including terms for internal prostheses, may have made some relevant articles hard to identify. The review examined external lower-limb prostheses only, so it does not address outcome measurement for internal prostheses. The articles that reported validity or reliability data included relatively few children who use lower-limb prostheses, and the samples were mostly older children. No responsiveness data or normative data were found for any measure examined.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the five measures with published evidence as fully validated for children who use lower-limb prostheses. The review found no complete assessment for any measure, and no data showed that any measure can detect change over time.